O’Connor on euthanasia concerns

Simon O’Connor writes:

In a month or so, we will see over one thousand New Zealanders having ended their lives by euthanasia.   This is based on the Ministry of Health’s latest reports on euthanasia/assisted suicide state that since the law came into effect (November 2021) till June this year, 867 people have died already.

My opposition to euthanasia is well known but I think many people will still find this number very high for a ‘service’ that has been running for just under three years. 

During the same time period around 100,000 NZers have died, so euthanasia is contributing to around 1% of that. Rates in other countries where it is legal range from 0.4% to 4% so 1% seems pretty ordinary.

When we take the latest quarterly report (end of June) and look back over the previous twelve months, there is a reported total of 347 deaths by euthanasia/assisted suicide.  However, when you read the annual report from the Register that covers the same time period, she says there were 344 deaths.

The same discrepancies exist when you compare the number of applications for assisted suicide/euthanasia.  The quarterly reports say 847, while the annual report say 834.

While there is probably a benign explanation for this, I agree it is bad for the numbers to vary on something as important as this.

The reports also note that only one in every one hundred people are being referred for a psychological assessment when requesting euthanasia or assisted dying.  This is extraordinarily low, indicating that doctors are either missing the signs or ignoring them.

Every day we see headlines about significant and widespread mental health issues in New Zealand and yet we are somehow to believe that only 1% of all those seeking euthanasia have psychological issues worthy of further consideration. 

This doesn’t surprise me as the criteria for euthanasia is so tight – you must be in unbearable pain and expected to die within six months. If the criteria was less strict, I would expect far more psychological assessments.

Up until very recently, the three person body known as the  End of Life Review Committee, has never been fully constituted.  This committee is meant to comprise of a medical professional (doctor), a health professional (e.g. a nurse), and an ethicist. Since euthanasia became legal the review committee has struggled to have either an ethicist or a doctor on the panel.

I was unaware of this. It is good the panel is now complete.

The sad irony is that the government fully funds euthanasia but refuses to fully – or even better – fund palliative care.  Euthanasia ends life prematurely.  Palliative care gives life to the very end.   I know which one I would preference funding for.

It would be nice to fund both but I don’t think it is quite a trade off. The cost of an assisted death to the taxpayer is $1,087.20 so a total cost of say $500,000 a year compared to the cost of palliative care of $186 million a year. You could even argue that euthanasia reduces the cost of palliative care.